Francis Berger
  • Blog
  • My Work

The Altar-Civilization Model is Over

7/22/2022

22 Comments

 
If you visit The Orthosphere fairly regularly, as I do, then you have surely noticed the "Wherever an altar is found, there civilization exists" quote beneath the site's title.

The quote comes from Joseph de Maistre, the Savoyard philosopher who railed against the French Revolution and its rationalist rejection of Christianity in favor of the traditional social and religious hierarchies the Revolution sought to replace. Simply put, Joseph de Maistre was a reactionary; when it came to matters of civilization, he argued for the tried and true model of a civilization ordered around Christian supremacy and its contingent external institutions and hierarchies.

The placement of de Maistre's "wherever an altar is found" quote on The Orthosphere site serves as somewhat of a declaration of the perspectives, attitudes, and viewpoints of the site's writers, most of whom identify as reactionaries of some stripe or other.

Like de Maistre, Orthosphere writers heavily emphasize the social, cultural, and political aspects of Christianity and, quite rightly argue that society, culture, and politics in the West all tend to go to hell once Christianity is taken out of the equation.

Remove the altar and you remove civilization. In this sense, sites like The Orthosphere continue the de Maistre reactionary impetus to steer civilization back toward a model based on God and Creation, and in this impetus, they have my complete sympathy for the simple reason that any civilization not based on religion will inevitably collapse and cease to exist. At the same time, I do not believe that our civilization can be saved. Moreover, I increasingly sense that our civilization will probably have to collapse for Christianity to flourish once again.
 
Though I respect and support the utter necessity of basing civilization on religion, I am wary of the motivation behind the restoration of the traditional Christian civilizational model lauded by reactionaries like de Maistre. To begin with, I do not believe such a restoration is even possible today. The time chasm and gaping cultural abyss separating contemporary reactionaries from their eighteenth-century role models are far too great to bridge.

The traditional altar-civilization infrastructure still existed in some cohesive form – both externally in the world and internally in the minds and hearts of men – when de Maistre and his contemporaries worked to restore it, but the same cannot be said of today.

Our modern world marks the terminus of the traditional altar-civilization model. Civilization abandoned the altar, and the altar eventually abandoned civilization. In our time and place, altar and civilization are merged into an anti-civilizational force that is explicitly opposed to God and Creation. Thus, de Maistre’s dictum regarding altars and civilizations no longer rings true, at least not in the conventional sense.

Having said that, I continue to have the deepest respect for sites like The Orthosphere for one simple reason – they understand that civilization – in the proper sense of the term – can only exist if it is based on and motivated by religion.

At the same time, I find the casual dismissal or downgrading of consciousness development espoused by many of the writers at sites like The Orthosphere troubling. Such writers and thinkers support the view that civilization has taken a step – or several steps – in the wrong direction, and that the only way to right our sinking civilizational ship is to retrace our steps to the spot where we took the wrong step and re-establish ourselves in traditional Christendom, complete with Christian social hierarchies anchored in a strong and unified Christian church that holds sway over all temporal matters.

The problem with this approach is it doesn’t fully consider the reality of consciousness development – that is, the simple fact that modern people are much different from the people who inhabited traditional Christendom. Nor does it offer any satisfactory answers to the question of why people chose to step away from the traditional altar-civilization model of consciousness. It also offers poor explanations as to why the altar eventually chose to follow civilization rather than lead it.

Another problem with the altar-civilization paradigm is it leaves reactionaries and conservatives with very little room in which to maneuver spiritually. If Christianity is primarily a cultural, social, and political force, then what becomes of Christianity if all the cultural, social, and political forces of the world – including the altars – are subverted against Christianity? Moreover, how much should individual Christians invest into “saving” or “restoring” a civilization that has willfully abandoned its altars? What exactly would a Christian be saving or restoring? And would such saving and restoration hinder or fulfill Christianity?

Times like these are a crucial test for those who adhere to the conventional altar-civilization model of Christianity, but they don’t need to be.

On the one hand, the collapse of the altar-civilization model can be viewed as the catastrophe of all catastrophes, a gaping gorge from which it will be extremely difficult if not impossible to emerge. On the other hand, the collapse of the altar-civilization model can also be viewed as the beginning of a heightened form of Christian spirituality and religiosity, one that rises to fulfill Christianity.

​The reactionary model seeks to restore in order to avoid collapse, but the present suggests that the way forward lies not in reaction and restoration, but in resurrection and creation, in something resembling what Nikolai Berdyaev outlines in The Divine and The Human (bold added):  
 
Religious discussion centers upon the possibility of new revelation and a new spiritual epoch. All other questions are secondary. The new revelation is not at all a new religion, distinct from Christianity, but rather the fulfilment and completion of the Christian revelation, bringing it to a true universality. This we do not have as yet. But we cannot simply wait for the revelation of the spirit. It depends upon man's creative activity as well. It is not to be understood as only a new revelation of God to man: it is also the revelation of man to God. This means that it will be a divine-human revelation. In the Spirit, the divisions and contradictions of the divine and the human will be overcome, while the distinction between them will be maintained. This will be the crowning of the mystical dialectic of the divine and the human.
 
The opening of a new epoch of the Spirit, which will include higher achievements of spirituality, presupposes a radical change and a new orientation in human consciousness. This will be a revolution of consciousness which hitherto has been considered as something static. The religion of the Spirit will be the religion of man's maturity, leaving behind him his childhood and adolescence....
 
In the religion of the Spirit, the religion of freedom, everything will appear in a new light: there will be neither authority nor reward: the nightmare of a legalistic conception of Christianity and of eternal punishment will finally disappear. It will be founded, not upon judgment and recompense, but on creative development and transfiguration, on likeness to God.
 
The religion of the Spirit is the expectation that a new human and humane sociality will be revealed, radiating love and charity. It is also the expectation of the revelation of a new relationship between man and the cosmos, of cosmic transfiguration. The process of the decomposition of the cosmos ... is nearing its end. {but} least of all does this mean an optimistic concept of the destiny of history.

The discovery of light does not mean a denial of darkness. On the contrary: before the advent of the epoch of Spirit man will have to pass through deepened shadow, through the epoch of night. We are living through the tragic experience of the de-spiritualization and devastation of nature, as it were, the disappearance of the cosmos (the discoveries of physics), the de-spiritualization and devastation of history (Marx and historical materialism), the de-spiritualization and devastation of the mind (Freud and psycho-analysis).

​The end of the war and revolution has disclosed terrible cruelty: humaneness is vanishing. It is as though the Creator has withdrawn from creation. He is present only incognito (a favorite expression of Kierkegaard). But all this may be understood as a dialectic moment in the revelation of the Spirit, and a new spiritual life. One must die, in order to live again. Man and the world are being crucified. But the final word will belong to the Resurrection.


Note added: This post is not a swipe at The Orthosphere or its bloggers. The gentlemen at the Orthosphere are all highly intelligent, well-meaning Christians. I support their blog and maintain cordial relations with them. As I mention above, I have a deep respect for The Orthosphere, and I believe its bloggers are all on the right side. What am I trying to do here is encourage the expansion of exploratory thinking beyond the altar-civilization model to which so many Christians seem indivisibly wed. 


22 Comments
bruce charlton
7/22/2022 08:36:11

@Frank - I agree with you. I was one of the founders of the Orthosphere, at a time when I was on a path to become Eastern Orthodox; and had a catholic ideal of Christianity.

Indeed, when I first became a Christian, it was bound-up with the hope for strength and cohesion from a church - to resist and fight the evils of atheist leftist modernity. This led naturally to the Throne-Altar-Civilization equation.

I stopped posting at the Orthosphere as a became convinced by Mormon theology, and then continued to incorporate insights from Arkle, Barfield, Steiner etc leading to Romantic Christianity.

But in the past decade, the 'Altar'-based Christianity has gone from mere weakness and decline, to an active - and increasingly explicit - embrace of the totalitarian globalist agenda.

This eventuated in the world-historical disaster of prolonged and international church closures during the birdemic - with not just the cooperation of church leaders, but their enthusiastic/ fanatical endorsement.

This extraordinary rupture in the history of the Christian churches has been all but ignored, and seemingly forgotten already, by the traditionalists, and indeed devout church-rooted Christians of all types (including Mormons). Yet I regard it as of profound and world-changing significance.

The Christian churches, including the largest and most powerful - the Roman Catholic - are now *overall*, in net-effect, on the side of the Enemy.

I predict that this will become apparent when the present worst-ever 'Pope' goes - because he will probably be replaced by somebody *even-worse-yet* - that being the way of things when an institution has become corrupted and is on an un-repented down-path.

Bad institutions generate bad leaders; even-worse institutions (worse as a consequence of the first bad leader) generate even-worse leaders.

Francis has permeated his church with evil bishops (and purged sincere and devout Catholics), and given them more power - so the RCC has no institutional desire to repent, but the opposite.

Anyway, my point does not hinge on the validity of this specific prediction, but on the point that we *should not* be trying to restore an obedience-based, externally-driven, church-regulated model of Christian life.

Reply
Francis Berger
7/22/2022 11:17:33

@ Bruce - Being raised Catholic, I too had fairly traditional views about what was required, but the older I got, the more I realized how a) difficult if not impossible a return to a traditional model of Christendom would be, and b) how undesirable such a development would be from the perspective of religious/Christian consciousness.

"we *should not* be trying to restore an obedience-based, externally-driven, church-regulated model of Christian life."

That's what it comes down today. Something else is needed.

Reply
William Wildblood
7/22/2022 10:39:09

I completely agree with your excellent appraisal of the spiritual situation, Frank. We cannot go back to the past because the law of life is growth, specifically growth of consciousness. I sympathise with the reactionary position because we are in the middle of chaos but this is probably a stripping away of dead wood to allow new growth. Unfortunately there's a lot of dead wood.

Reply
Francis Berger
7/22/2022 11:23:32

@ William - Thanks. I sympathize with the conservative/reactionary position too because it at least aims to re-establish some sense of divine order, but the divine order it seeks to restore no longer works and will not work going forward. This leads me to believe that the answer does not reside in order alone, but elsewhere.

Reply
William Wildblood
7/22/2022 13:04:39

I would say the answer is in a balance between order and freedom but to get that balance right requires being alive to the spiritual currents of past, present and future.

Hoyos
7/22/2022 12:05:44

Evangelicals catch a lot of heat, but they cottoned on to something when they said “it’s not a religion, it’s a relationship”. That’s a wrong understanding of the word religion, but you get the gist. What follows is my own thoughts, might have things wrong.

I think about that a lot, I read many descriptions of plans and ideas and think the response “Great, is that what God’s telling you to do?” The OT history is in my view instructive in this, not just the battles where God tells His people when to fight and punished them when they “go up” without His blessing but specifically with Moses.

When Moses struck the rock instead of speaking to it, he was kind of doing “magic”. The “procedure” or system of striking the rock had “worked” before but that wasn’t the point at all, God wanted Moses to do what He said, wanted Moses to believe Him, and Moses chose a procedure over the voice of God.

Now I think I’m more “traditional” then some, I believe in doctrinal orthodoxy and the church structure but think it’s always in danger of striking the rock when we should be speaking to it. We’re always looking to go beyond what God said or find something that doesn’t require personal leading that existed even in the Old Testament in Proverbs but I believe us probably much stronger now.

“Every heretic and cult leader claims to be led by God!” Yeah and they’re wrong; there’s no substitute for judgement and there’s no system for going outside in when you should be going inside out.

Reply
JMSmith link
7/22/2022 14:14:59

This Orthospherian is not offended by critique, especially by a critique as courteous and thoughtful as this one. I have more than once told Kristor that Orthosphere is really a misnomer since disobedient complaint is the great theme of the site. I wasn’t present at the creation of the Orthosphere, so I don’t know why they chose the Maistre quote (or Guido Reni painting) for the banner, but I would guess it was to brandish the sword of anti-modern (Maistre) pugnacity (St. Michael). To my mind anti-modernism means radicalism, not put-back-the-clockism, although I have personally tried to practice what might be called antiquarian radicalism. That is to say scouring the past for sticks of dynamite that explode contemporary cant.

I agree with what you say about spiritual evolution and the need to put our wine in new wineskins. I am fully aware of all the horrible mischief that has been done under the pretext of liturgical reform, and I have no concrete liturgical reforms to propose, but I am painfully conscious of being a sheep that is not being fed. I stopped attending mass because it was a numbing combination of liberal browbeating and kitsch. For twenty years I excused the kitsch by telling myself that it apparently spoke to other people; but I finally decided that I needed a Church that once in a while spoke to me.

I read the Maistre quote as saying that every civilization has its altar, the only question being the nature of the sacrifice that is offered on that altar. The public sacrifice of the old Christian civilization was, of course, a reenactment of the one sufficient sacrifice, and this is why Christian altars were not covered in blood. There are altars in post-Christian civilization, but they are again bloody altars, like those of long ago.

I agree with what you say about resurrection rather than restoration. The only way to new life is through death. This is true for us as individuals, and it also true for civilizations, churches, and the race of Man at large. A tired man can temporarily revive himself with stimulants like coffee, tobacco, and alcohol, and by these means he can prolong his day into the small hours; but what a tired man really needs to do is lay down and sleep. This means that we can only postpone the death of a moribund civilization and church, and that the better course is to let them go to sleep. Rather than propping them up with the equivalents of coffee, tobacco, and alcohol, we should be plan for how we and our offspring will survive the aftermath without degenerating into heathens and barbarians.

Reply
Francis Berger
7/22/2022 21:45:37

@ JM - I appreciate the thoughtful response. In my mind, it all comes down to putting first things first. In this time and place I believe we have reached the point where Christians must ask themselves some serious, occasionally unsettling but utterly necessary questions about what should come first in Christianity.

Reply
Francis Berger
7/22/2022 21:54:56

@ William - I agree about balancing freedom and order, but the more I think about it, the more I realize that the right kind of freedom must precede the establishment of order.

Traditional models tend to value order over freedom. Or, more specifically, they often sacrificed freedom for the sake of order.

Secularists and materialists sacrificed order for freedom (only to clamp down on freedom later).

The opposite appears to be required now. The wrong kind of freedom has led to Ahrimanic order becoming Sorathic disorder -- I sense the next "order" will only emerge after a new and deeper understanding of freedom is achieved.

Reply
Woody Jones
7/23/2022 19:53:38

What church did you find that works for you, Prof.?

Reply
Francis Berger
7/22/2022 21:33:22

@ imnobody00 - If you want to participate in the discussion and make your views known on this blog, you're going to have to dial back the snark -- quite considerably . . .

In the meantime, I'll respond to one point in your wall of text comment regarding the refutation of the development of human consciousness:

"People are composed by biology and culture."

I find it interesting that you do not mention spirit. On the other hand, I'm not at all surprised. Some traditionalists spend so much time focusing on biology and culture that they tend to forget all about spirit.

Biology and culture are secondary to spirit. If people are composed of anything, it is spirit -- first and foremost.

Biology and culture should not determine spirit; spirit should determine biology and culture.

Reply
Mickvet
7/23/2022 10:56:24

Francis, I don't subscribe to the notion of evolution of consciousness (I find the Darwinian theory of biological evolution quite shaky also, but that's a different story). Consciousness is another word for soul, I believe, and once created, the soul is eternal and in my opinion only subject to that change which is derived from personal experience. I do not think that the souls of modern man are different in essence from the souls of any previous humans. It is only the experiences that we have to face that have changed. We have to work out our salvation in the same fear and trembling that St. Paul and his contemporaries did and as with the Cromagnons, Aristotle and any other human being you care to mention.

Reply
JMSmith link
7/23/2022 14:15:33

The essence of the human soul cannot change without us ceasing to be humans, but I think the windows of the human soul can face in a different direction. And it is those windows that I think of as consciousness. I'd suggest a trivial analogy with jokes, which can make one generation roll on the floor and another generation yawn and check their watches. The soul doesn't change but it responds to different stimuli. When it comes to the nourishment of the soul, the symbols that do this effectively change with the years. Religious poems that brought tears to my granny's eyes leave me cold, although my soul is no different than her's

Reply
Francis Berger
7/23/2022 17:11:23

@ Mickvet @ JM Smith - Dr. Smith makes an important distinction in his comment - the soul and consciousness are not synonymous.

Consciousness is usually defined as the awareness of external and internal existence, but I tend to think of it as the manner in which we perceive, understand, know, and relate to ourselves, others, God, and Creation. Consciousness is not merely a matter of the external influencing the internal; it is also a matter of the internal "creating" the external.

Also, the evolution of consciousness should not be regarded in the Darwinian sense of evolution, but rather as development and unfolding. Human consciousness is not static but dynamic -- it is in the process of unfolding.

History reveals that the manner in which people know, understand, and relate to themselves, others, and God does change and has changed through history -- to the point that modern consciousness denies the very existence of God and souls! This would have been unthinkable to earlier people, yet in our modern world, it has become an accepted and endorsed position. This cannot be attributed solely to lived experience. If it can be, then the logic goes that a tenth-century peasant transported to our world would become godless within a year or two, or that a modern person transported to tenth-century France would immediately become a devout and pious true believing Catholic.

Thus, your point about Cromagnons, Aristotle, and every other human being in history being the same in terms of consciousness is misguided. A Cromagnon was totally immersed in his world, both physically and spiritually (Owen Barfield's concept of Original Participation); and the world of a Cromagnon was totally immersed in him. Ancient Greeks who lived centuries before Jesus would have been baffled by the concept of Christian love. A tenth-century peasant would have been abhorred by the idea that being a member of a church was inessential, and that he could seek salvation outside of his Church. And so on . . .

I often conceptualize the evolution of consciousness as stages toward maturity, very much like our own stages of childhood, adolescence, and mature adulthood. From a spiritual perspective, consciousness is stuck in rebellious adolescence that must be overcome and "grown out of". Returning to childhood is not the answer.

But for any of this to make an impression, you have to believe that the historical evolution of consciousness is built into Creation by God -- that he wants us to perceive him, know him, and relate to him in more "mature" ways and not remain in the "pious peasant" mode of Christianity.

Your point about us having to work out our own salvation -- individually, using personal discernment and internal resources -- addresses the reality of consciousness development.

bruce charlton
7/23/2022 18:14:55

Sorry to 'muscle-in' on Frank's blog - but this is a subject of great concern to me! You talk of the essence of the human soul as if the only way we could remain humans would be if there was an essence.

But this necessity is based on metaphysical assumptions from ancient Greek Philosophy, barely noticed or seldom acknowledged as assumptions.

If these assumptions are maintained then it is probably necessary to divide the human into body, soul and also spirit - the soul being what changes through time (to account for the obvious appearance changes) and the spirit being the eternal essence that maintains identity.

This was Steiner's solution - but in fact I don't think it works either.

I think the problem derives from the use of definitions of body, soul plus/minus spirit that exclude time - and then trying to introduce change. This leads to variations on Zeno's paradox - trying to get movement from stasis cannot work.

In fact I think the true answer is to consider how we used to regard identity when we were children - simply as uninterrupted continuity - but to extend this from bodies to focus on the spirit (with bodies considered as 'condensations' of spirit).

I tried to explain it here: https://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2020/11/cross-sectional-temporal-definitions-of.html

But the point of it all is to suggest that we need to include time in our most basic metaphysical assumptions of reality - and this is naturally done (spontaneously) by understanding created reality as constituted by Beings.

Bookslinger
7/23/2022 16:47:06

FB: you're right. Over a year before the 'demic, the CoJCoLDS started a transition to a "home-centered, church-supported" model of the gospel. We were prepared for "home church services" incl sunday school before the birdy was on the radar.

--
David Bednar, April 2019, “Prepared to Obtain Every Needful Thing”
“We should not expect the Church as an organization to teach or tell us everything we need to know and do to become devoted disciples and endure valiantly to the end.”
https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2019/04/54bednar?lang=eng

Reply
Mickvet
7/23/2022 20:51:41

I can't reply directly, but just in relation to my supposedly being 'misguided'. I would assert that Cromagnon man, Aristotle et al did not differ in terms of consciousness/soul (obviously a huge mystery to define, as Bruce has suggested), but in terms of their experiences, on other words, the events and knowledge to which they were exposed. I believe that if I was exposed to the same experiences as Cromagnon man I would have reacted broadly similarly, bearing in mind that every individual soul/consciousness is unique. I won't go with the idea of some kind of evolution or development of consciousness. Every man's consciousness dies with him. It leaves no permanent type that can be inherited by anyone else. I can transfer the knowledge I have accumulated and an account of the events I have experienced to my survivors, but they might reject or forget. So we'll have to agree to disagree. Nevertheless, I was unaware of your existence before (when I saw Francis mentioned, I first thought it was a reference to the present pope!), and I ought to find the time to study your deep Catholic thought.

Reply
Francis Berger
7/23/2022 21:54:00

@ Mickvet - Fair enough. The development of consciousness is a metaphysical assumption. As such, I cannot "prove" it to you with hard evidence. One is free to accept or reject the assumption. Having said that, I would encourage you to keep an open mind about it as a possibility.

As for the Francis thing, I must confess this causes me a great deal of consternation when I browse blog post titles on aggregator sites like Synlogos. Whenever I read things like, "Francis says Christians must be more tolerant of leftists" or "Francis declares mass migration to be a human right", my immediate reaction is usually, "What? Wait a minute! I didn't say that!"

Reply
Anthony Probst
7/23/2022 22:18:43

'Alter the civilization' is the working plan now.

Reply
Francis Berger
7/23/2022 22:50:33

@ Anthony - Ha! Brilliant!

Reply
Lady Mermaid link
7/24/2022 05:16:37

I honestly dislike the term "reactionary". It makes it seem like one is defined primarily in opposition to something. While evil must be opposed, we need to be running towards something, not simply away from something. I hope you're wrong about civilization needing to collapse before repentance, but I'm afraid that will be the case. The reaction to the Roe v. Wade decision is quite telling. Many people are doubling down on the sexual revolution rather than repenting while there is still time.

This has certainly sparked an interesting discussion. To be honest, I don't think traditionalism and romantic Christianity are that different. Tradition is not stagnant, but dynamic. Jesus compares the kingdom of heaven to a mustard seed that grows dramatically. Consciousness or the soul has always been developing since the time of Adam. If liberalism and the Enlightenment had never happened, western civilization would have continued to grow, though probably in a healthier manner. It would not have remained in the Middle Ages indefinitely. Liberalism erred not b/c of development of consciousness; it failed b/c it abandoned God.

Many people have prayed for God to heal the schisms that have afflicted the Church since Chalcedon. While God is certainly NOT behind the evil birdemic church closures, He can take what was meant for evil and turn it into good. Learning to rely on the Holy Spirit has led to certain unity among Christians from various denominations. They will certainly not agree on everything, but the Spirit of the Lord is definitely present among these real Christians. Berdyaev believed that individual freedom oriented towards God would ironically lead to a truly universal Christianity. This freedom does not involve abandoning tradition, but going deeper into it on an individual basis.

This reminds me of a discussion over a year ago around this topic.

https://nolongerreading.blogspot.com/2021/01/what-is-red-queen-religion.html

https://nolongerreading.blogspot.com/2021/03/why-development-three-ways-of-thinking.html

Romantic Christianity is based on tradition and grows from it. It is analogous to learning arithmetic all the way to linear algebra. The basics cannot be skipped, but one must move forward to progress.

I like the C.K. Chesteron quote ""Tradition is tending the flame, not worshiping the ashes"





Reply
Anti-Gnostic
7/27/2022 05:03:53

Nobody wants to believe that the institution to which they've pledged their loyalty, raised their families, and donated thousands of dollars is a hollow shell. Thus the arguments on the Orthosphere are strangely self-referential for such learned men.

Good luck explaining to non-believers where the Church resides. Really, if you have to spend more than 10 minutes fleshing that out, you don't really have a religious faith; you're just a religious sect.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Picture

    RSS Feed

    Blog and Comments

    Blog posts tend to be spontaneous, unpolished, first draft entries ranging from the insightful and periodically profound to the poorly-argued and occasionally disparaging.
     

    Comments are moderated. Anonymous comments are never published (please use your name or a pseudonym). 

    Emails welcome:

    f er en c ber g er (at) h otm   ail (dot) co m
    Blogs/Sites I Read
    Bruce Charlton's Notions
    Meeting the Masters
    From The Narrow Desert
    Synlogos ✞ Aggregator
    New World Island  
    New World Island YouTube
    ​Steeple Tea
    Berdyaev.com
    Adam Piggott
    Fourth Gospel Blog
    The Orthosphere
    Junior Ganymede

    Archives

    March 2023
    February 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    October 2022
    September 2022
    August 2022
    July 2022
    June 2022
    May 2022
    April 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    October 2021
    September 2021
    August 2021
    July 2021
    June 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    September 2020
    August 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    July 2018
    May 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    November 2016
    June 2016
    March 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    July 2015
    April 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    February 2014
    January 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    May 2013
    April 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012

    Picture
    A free PDF is also available in My Work. 
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.